Cases against Pope Benedict and Cardinal Wetter dropped

Investigators: proceedings against Ratzinger and Wetter discontinued

The Public Prosecutor's Office has discontinued its investigations into possible aiding and abetting abuse against former Munich archbishops Joseph Ratzinger and Friedrich Wetter. There was no suspicion of criminal action, they said.

In its investigations in connection with the abuse report in the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising, the Munich I Public Prosecutor's Office at times also listed former Archbishops Friedrich Wetter and Joseph Ratzinger as defendants. However, the investigations into possible aiding and abetting abuse have been discontinued, according to the Public Prosecutor's Office. There had been no sufficient suspicion of criminal acts by the church personnel managers.

However, the hurdles for criminal prosecution of aiding and abetting are high, said Hans Kornprobst, senior public prosecutor, at a press conference. For example, with the main offence - such as sexual abuse - the aiding and abetting also lapses, which makes further investigations impossible.

Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, was Archbishop of Munich and Freising from 1977 to 1982, Wetter headed the archdiocese from 1982 to 2008. Independently of the end of the prosecution investigation, preparations are underway at the Traunstein Regional Court for a court case concerning a civil suit brought by a victim of abuse from Bavaria. This also concerns the late Pope Benedict XVI.

Six cases intensively investigated

45 cases had been handed over to the Public Prosecutor's Office by the law firm Westpfahl Spilker Wastl, which had prepared the abuse report for the archdiocese. In 39 of them, the authority found no starting point for further investigations in a preliminary examination procedure, as public prosecutor Angela Miechielsen explained. Six cases in which perpetrators of abuse had continued to be employed in pastoral care and there were indications of renewed and not yet statute-barred offences had been investigated in separate preliminary proceedings.

The public prosecutor emphasised that in no case had there been indications that the church personnel officers had themselves committed abuse. Rather, there had been "aiding and abetting" by personnel decisions. Ratzinger had been an accused in two of these proceedings, Wetter and the former vicar general Gerhard Gruber in five each. In the case of the current archbishop, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, no indications of criminally relevant behaviour had been found.

"Poison cabinet" dissolved long ago

In five cases, according to the Public Prosecutor's Office, the possible acts of abuse were already time-barred or could not be proven. In one case, it had not been possible to prove that Cardinal Wetter had already known about abuse allegations beforehand and had nevertheless left the priest in service. "He himself said he had no recollection," Miechielsen said.

In connection with this case, the Public Prosecutor's Office also searched the Ordinariate, i.e. the administrative authority of the archdiocese, as well as the Archbishop's Palace and thus Cardinal Marx's official residence at the end of February. The suspicion that files might have been hidden was not confirmed. According to Miechielsen, the search revealed that there used to be a "so-called poison cabinet, but it was dissolved long ago". The documents from it had been "given to the personal files of the respective priests".

With the discontinuation of the proceedings, the public prosecutor's examination of possible criminal offences by church leaders was concluded, said the public prosecutor. However, should those affected still file charges in cases that are not time-barred, the discontinued investigation could also be resumed.

Chief public prosecutor refers to "dark area"

The abuse report of the law firm Westpfahl Spilker Wastl (WSW) is certainly of great importance for the internal church processing and the social debate, said Kornprobst. "However, for our work, for law enforcement, this data was of very, very little use." Many of the cases described in the report were time-barred or not criminally relevant, others were already known to the judiciary.

Experience shows that acts of abuse are "hardly ever solved or discovered by analysing files", "but as a rule by an aggrieved person filing a criminal complaint and thus initiating an investigation". At the same time, the senior public prosecutor pointed to a dark field: "We have to assume that by far not all cases have been reported."

"No special rights under criminal law" for church

At the same time, Kornprobst rejected accusations that the judiciary treats the Church with kid gloves. No public prosecutor in his office had "inhibitions about investigating a clergyman or other member of the church". The Church has no special rights under criminal law.

The Chief Public Prosecutor attested to the Archbishop's Office that it had made a visible effort to support the investigations that had begun in 2018. He said there was no evidence that the church had withheld relevant documents from the Public prosecutor's office. "Rather, the actions of the diocese during the entire investigation were characterised by full cooperation and also borne by an unconditional desire to clarify the matter."

Criticism from the Greens and the FDP

According to Gabriele Triebel, spokeswoman on religious policy of the Green state parliamentary group, the report of the Public Prosecutor's Office proves that church officials would have known about sexual abuse by priests. "The fact that these cases are time-barred and thus no longer relevant under criminal law is evidence of leadership failure in the Ministry of Justice." Ten years ago, an expert opinion had already been on the table and had "simply been ignored". "There must never be such special treatment of the churches again!"

Senior Public Prosecutor Kornprobst said during the press conference that from today's point of view it would have been better if the Public Prosecutor's Office had received this expert opinion as soon as it was completed. "Although this would not have led to significantly different results in terms of criminal law according to today's knowledge, it would have prevented corresponding speculation."

Source